←back to thread

1725 points taubek | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.643s | source
Show context
kjuulh ◴[] No.35324204[source]
After having been on Linux for years (Debian server and Arch desktop), and MacOS for work. Having to use Windows is downright jarring. Every time I have to fix something, or do regular tasks it become apparent how little windows is suited by itself for power users.

As mentioned in the article, it can't get used to ads or tabloid news everywhere, it just feels wrong. I could spend some time removing them, but I'd rather not have to fight with Microsoft every time the product updates, I'd rather just avoid using it entirely. It is insane that you pay for a product, but is still served ads or tabloid news.

When I use debian for my server usage, I have most of the essential tools available, but when I use windows I either have to install a whole bunch of tools, or make do with the lackluster experience. I dread having to fix a windows server installation.

MacOS as well feels overrated, the UX has gotten noticeably worse over the years, unnecessary notifications that doesn't go away themselves, lackluster window management out of the box. MacOS is best for me when it exposes its unix roots so I can just get to work, the native stuff feels half baked at best. It does feel fast at least (m1 is a beast, by far the best laptop I've ever owned)

Linux (Arch) feels like it puts the user in control, I've had less errors for my arch home-server (which does see quite a bit of traffic), it does have sharp edges but I always feel in control of what is going on, or at least have the tools to fix it.

The desktop side is not quite as reliable, I've had to tinker with the bluetooth settings more than I'd like, that and audio (which may be a kde issue). Steam has been great, and I rarely have to jump into windows anymore.

Linux (Debian) feels solid, it has been super reliable over the years.

I may have become too used to the Linux way, which is why I am shitting a bit on Windows and MacOS, and those product definitely aren't for me. So take my rant with a grain of salt.

replies(3): >>35324221 #>>35324687 #>>35325279 #
1. M95D ◴[] No.35325279[source]
And Linux is different? Do you have ANY IDEEA how hard it is to prevent the installation of dbus or systemd?
replies(2): >>35326080 #>>35326451 #
2. BenjiWiebe ◴[] No.35326080[source]
It's also pretty hard to prevent installation of libc. It's part of the OS, like dbus and systemd. There are distros of Linux that don't use systemd.

And I'm a power user who loves systemd. :)

replies(1): >>35328959 #
3. kjuulh ◴[] No.35326451[source]
To be fair I don't mention those because I've never hard problems with them. That said there are definitely some architectural thing I don't agree with in regards to systems, but overall I am fine with it. I will also take the ini format over xml anyday. Though scripting may be more intuitive.

The different libc backend is a bit of mess though and it can be quite cumbersome to get good compatibility of programs between libc variants.

4. M95D ◴[] No.35328959[source]
Except when you say "Linux", it's just a kernel. Everything else is... not linux. It may be GNU, or a specific computer program that uses that kernel.

The original post I replied to argued that Linux puts the user in control, unlike Windows or OSX/Apple.

My point is that for the last 10 years or so, it has become increasingly difficult to avoid certain parts of a linux-based OS, such as systemd and dbus, that reduces user's control over the system in the name of convenience.

I would like a Windows without scheduled tasks - no longer possible. In the same way as Windows does things on it's own, I would feel less in control if a NON-ROOT app could open a connection to a wireless network, or auto-mount a block device, or start a service/daemon, or change audio settings. It's less about how dbus or systemd is set up, but more about capabilities. I can't say much about how a Linux with those things installed could again be made secure, private and obedient to root user, because I never had them installed. That's not the point. I simply don't like what it CAN do.

PS: I have 3 Linux systems. 2 of them run musl. It's actually A LOT easier to change glibc with something else than have a desktop without dbus.